Licensed Counselor: "Minor Attracted Persons" are the most vilified people in our culture (child predators, education)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First you would have to define that word. Then you would have to predict the future, and/or attribute causes to things with or without evidence.
THIS is your comment on the topic? This is known as a deflection. When people deflect, they generally support what is being held up to scrutiny but are afraid to come right out and say so. How about a real comment on the topic?
THIS is your comment on the topic? This is known as a deflection. When people deflect, they generally support what is being held up to scrutiny but are afraid to come right out and say so. How about a real comment on the topic?
No, I mean it. The argument starts in bad faith when one makes such vague connotational comments like that at the very beginning. How many people support this out of the entire US population, really?
My question should reveal a lot. What is wokeness? It's my understanding that wokeness is originally to the understanding of USA's dark racist/prejudice history regarding slavery and its aftermath.
Does that lead to pedophilia?
Let's expand the definition: homosexual/bisexual people should have every right to sexual/romantic relations. Does that lead to pedophilia??
How about: USA is perhaps not the force-for-good country we were raised to believe via arguably propaganda, and has potentially committed war crimes, like many countries have throughout history? Does this line of thinking lead to... normalization of pedophilia???
Do you understand why I criticize the initial question now? It's not a pedophilia-induced deflection, I promise you. Let's define "wokeness" first".
There's not enough deterrent for this despicable crime.
Pedophiles even admit that nothing would stop them so life in a prison factory so they can earn their keep.
It's part of the costume. Anyone who is involved with LGBTQ, drag queen shows directed at children (NOT adults), pedophilia, inappropriate sex discussion with elementary school kids .... the list goes on and on.
They ALL wear oversized glasses.
It's like that all got the memo to dress alike.
For a group that is SO insistent that they are SO individual and unique and everyone needs to respect their individuality and uniqueness ... they all dress exactly the same and have the exact same opinions.
What is so wrong with calling someone what they are? The Dems have no problem calling a MAGA hat wearing stranger they see on the street a RACIST. That is pretty ugly.
MAP? They are Pedophiles, CHILD Molesters, they are sick and should be castrated if not thrown down a dark hole and left to rot. Better would be toss them into prison with the initials CM (Child Molester) tattooed on their foreheads and let prison justice take care of it.
It is just sick to target and sexualize the most innocent of our society.
What is it with the Dems that want to make the sexualization of children normal?
This push to normalize pedophilia is a result of the garbage in the minds of our kids that colleges are churning out. It’s now a societal decline as these kids engage in real life.
I understand why people try to change terms in order to make them sound more positive or palatable, but I don't understand how it can possibly work. When language is uttered, I will experience an idea or mental image of something.
Like here, supposedly "minor-attracted persons" is a more positive term than "pedophile." Why? "Pedo-" refers to children, "-phile" refers to something you have an affinity for or are attracted to. So "pedophile" is referring to the fact that you are attracted to children. To me, the term "minor-attracted persons" is more immediately descriptive of what you are. It sounds even worse to me.
I read something from a poster here today that mentioned the term "person of color" or "POC." As the poster mentioned, calling someone a "colored person" is now racist but the newly accepted term is "POC," which is almost literally the same term, just in reverse!
"Normal" is sometimes frowned upon, and assumed to be derogatory, when in actuality is referring to being in the range of what most people/things are.
"Retarded" is not accepted, when it merely refers to being limited in some way. It changed to "handicapped" and now, unless I'm behind the times, is referred to as "challenged," which all mean the same thing. I mean, "fire-retardant" simply means that fire is limited as far as it can burn.
I understand and agree with the fact that people want to avoid being cruel, but words are there to describe something, and no matter how hard you try, you have to describe what the facts are, if you're going to be honest, anyway.
Progressives continually strive to change the language with the goal of changing how people think and how the world is perceived. They’ve changed the meaning of “marriage”, “family”, “man” and “woman”. Add in “migrant”. All to normalize the abnormal and legitimize the illegitimate and illegal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.